Abstract

The increasing complexity of the decision-making process and the strategies to influence its outcomes, together with the dynamics of globalisation and the crisis of representative democracy, have amplified the problem of undue influence (or 'Policy Capture') on public decisions. The ensuing debate has identified the crime of 'Trafficking in Undue Influence' as a possible solution to be combined with measures of greater transparency and stakeholder involvement in policy-making. Australia and the United Kingdom, two of the most convinced and long-standing supporters of the democratic role of lobbies, have not introduced this offence in their legislation. The objective of this investigation is to understand which regulatory model can effectively counter current trends of regulatory capture and whether the crime of influence peddling is an essential component in this process